Wednesday 8 December 2010


December  7, 2010

Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder lavished with awards by the Economist magazine and celebrated by Forbes, Time and Der Spiegel, has finally been arrested on rape charges in the UK, sparking speculation that  Wikileaks will release documents and go „thermonuclear“.

(See below.)  Yawn, yawn.

It’s clear the US government can easily limit the damage of any leak just by filing injunctions to stop major media outlets like the New York Tomes and The Guardian from publishing stories. Why hasn’t it done this already?

The few „nuggets“in the current Wikileaks release just give a confirmation to what is already well known. Webster Tarpley and Alex Jones ran down the evidence that Assange has a hidden agenda and is a tool of bankers like George Soros in a programme yesterday.

Given the fact, the alternative media has so little interest in Assange or in spreading Wikileaks documents; the US government can limit the damage done by the “leaks” by filing injunctions to stop major media outlets like the New York Tomes and The Guardian from publishing stories. They will be about the only ones hyping the “thermonuclear” documents, I bet. Them and Eric Cantona and Max Keiser.

I, for one, have zero interest in looking at any of the Bank of America „thermonuclear data“that is expected to be released by Wikileaks. We all know banks like BoA are overleveraged „zig“times and have no money. That just is how the fractional reserve banking system operates and has been operating for decades. What’s new?

Since it is really only the major media outlets hyping the Wikileaks information, the US Justice Secretary could easily file injunctions to stop that today and spare us this tedious theatre.

 As for major releases of the names of spies and informants, why don’t US justice officials just pay a visit to George Soros and the Rothschild family, who are clearly linked to Assange and Wikileaks, and put some questions to them? And why don’t they drop by Hilary Clinton’s office. Just who had access to 250,000 confidential diplomatic cables, anyway?

It is widely accepted that the US government ~ like every government ~ has a legitimate right to keep its routine diplomatic cables confidential, so few see any infringement of media freedom.

Even the writer Mario Varagas Llosa said too much Wikileaks is dangerous.

“In simple terms, states would be placed in such a vulnerable position that institutions …, the very essence of democracy, would be in danger,” said Vargas Llosa.

Ron Paul’s argument that it is wrong to attack Assange because it is like „shooting the messenger“ of troubling foreign news obscures the reality that peaceful states need to make use of diplomacy that require confidentiality just as much as warlike states.

He has cut such a poor figure in this sordid episode that huge question mark has to be raised as to his real allegiance. To Wikileaks? Soros? Rothschild? Or to a functioning US state?


No comments:

Post a Comment

If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.